editorially speaking National Science Education Standards In the summer of 1991 the National Academy of Sciences, through its National Research Council (NRC), undertook the task of develonine euidelines for K-12 science education standards a t thk u;gng of the National Science Teachers Association, the National Association of Biology Teachers, the American Chemical Society, and the American Physical Society. Collectively these societies perceived the need for a nonpartisan body to convene a group of experts to develop science education standards. The NRC was the ideal group for the task since historically it has functioned as a bridge between this countm's scientists and engineers and thewashington political establishment. A draft of the standards was generated by a number of working groups that included practicing scientists; professional science educators; science teachers from elementary, middle, and high schools; and post-secondary science faculty. A draft of the National Science Education Standards anneared late last vear for review and comment. Commentireceived from tKe community will be assimilated, and the final version released in late 1995 (scheduled date). The National Science Education Standards call for teaching a kind of science that provides both a n understanding of the basic concepts required for success in our high technology society and the acquisition of process skill, i.e., the ability to proceed step by step to solve practical problems by examining the effect(s) of changing one variable a t a time. The Natjonal Sc~enreEduration Stnndnrdi also addreis a number ol'relnted arms. Cont(.nt Standard6 d t h e what all students, regardless of gender, cultural, or ethnic background, physical or learning disability, or interest and motivation in science, should understand and be able to do a s a result of their school learning experiences. This section of the Standards is desiened to allow those who use the Standards to discriminate between good and bad curricula. textbooks. and other teachindearnine materials. Severa1 important concepts pervade this section. Specifically, science is a n active process, and less is more, i.e., for students to understand more science, less emphasis must be given to some content. Teaching Standards provide a vision of science t h a t teachers need to understand. These Standards also urovide for students' learning experiences that are .aligned with the Content Standards. The Teaching Standards also lay a basis for the professionalization of teachers. For example, teachers are viewed as facilitators of cooperative learning and as coaches for "doing" science. Teachers need to be taught to teach these new ways. The Teaching Standards suggest that teachers have to control their teaching environment and that they need time to meet with other teachers as professionals. Assessment Standards identify essential characteristics of fair and accurate student assessments and program evaluations that are consistent with the Content Standards. Assessment is recognized as a systematic, multistep process involving the collection and interpretation of educational data. Assessments are deliberately designed to have explicitly stated purposes, to have a clear relation-
-
ship between the data and decisions, and to be internally consistent. Multiple choice tests are out. Science Content Standards incorporate eight categories of content.
.
Science as inquiry .Physical science Life science Earth and space science Science and technology Science in personal and social perspectives Histmy and nature of science Unifying concepts and processes
.
The first seven categories are clustered for grade levels
K-4, 5-8, and 9-12 based on a combination of factors including cognitive development theory, the classroom experience of teachers, organization of schools, and the framework of other disciplinary-based standards. The Content Standards encompass a complete set of outcomes for students; the sequence of their presentation is not arbitrary. Program or School Standards describe how content, teachine. -. and assessment are coordinated in school Drattice. The science curriculum is supposed to connect to other school subjects, especially mathematics. System Standards describe how policies, programs, and actions outside of the immediate learning t - aual- environment s u.~.n o rhieh . ity science programs. The strategy of establishing a suite of standards that address the important components of science education ensures that the reforms envisioned are systemic. It will be more difficult to undercut a n outstandina curriculum, for example, by stressing crlterla that arc c.isy to ;list%. This was tht! fate of some outstnndina sclence tcxthmki dt:vt*lto Snutnik. Without atTertnurd in the 1!160's in r(!io~~nsr ing the system, it was easy to select, inadvertently, for the curricula that were the easiest to teach and to test. A number of school districts across the nation have successfully pioneered parts of the reforms contemplated by the NRC; perhaps one percent of the school children nationally are being exposed to the type of hands-on science that thev will need for their future. Unfortunatelv... there is no mechanism for continuous cycles of improvement in d a c e in our schools. In contrast with manv critical activities in our society where continuous improvement is a given, e.g., the manufacture of computers, our education system has not incorporated a process to monitor and to make continuous improvement. Improvement of our system of science education a t the precollege level depends on continuous attention to the development of in-service teachers and to the improvement of teacher-education curricula. In both cases, college science faculty have important responsibilities and roles to play. They can, a t the very least, ensure that the science taught in our schools is accurate and up-to-date. And, who knows, perhaps they will be caught up in the teaching process, which is, of course, the fundamental basis for their academic appointment. JJL Volume 72 Number 4 April 1995
287
